Is zakah obligatory on a woman's jewelry?

The questioner : The other issue is the ruling on zakah on gold, given that I am a student of knowledge, as you know. I read a lot, and I have not seen, approximately, anyone who makes zakah obligatory on women's jewelry. However, the majority view is that it is the safer course, and some have said: there is no zakah at all on women's jewelry, if it is a reasonable amount, meaning a reasonable sum. So I do not know what the definitive answer is to this question?

The Shaykh : The definitive answer, may Allah reward you, came explicitly in the hadith: . She said: No. He said: .

The questioner : ... the jewelry that she wears, even what she wears?

The Shaykh : Oh?

The questioner : A woman's jewelry, even what she wears?

Another questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Yes, that is it, because the question is about a gold ring. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) saw a gold ring on a woman's hand and said: . She said: No. He said: . Those who say that zakah is not obligatory on jewelry, women's jewelry, whether it is gold or silver, they have no legal proof. Their proof is only a proof of opinion and citation, nothing more. And they are refuted—meaning the refutation is established against them—by two methods. The first method: the explicit text, such as what I mentioned earlier. The other method: the general evidences that obligate paying zakah on the two currencies (gold and silver). It is not necessary that there be a detailed ruling for every type of silver or gold. If there is no text regarding a specific type, it is said: this is not included! Let me give an example now: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade gold and silver plates." And the reality is that many people, as they pray and fast, fall into some violations of the Shari'ah. Among these is that they consume riba (usury or interest), they consume riba. Among these is that they build their houses for showing off, boasting, and extravagance with money, and this is also observed. From this extravagance: gold and silver vessels, showing off with plates, cups, and so on, gold or silver. Here comes the question: Is there zakah on these vessels or not? If someone says: No, there is no zakah on them, what is your proof, my brother? We say: There is zakah on them because they are of the two mined metals, gold and silver. So if the one who wants to say that this type, whether it is jewelry, or vessels, or anything else, wants to say: there is no zakah on it, he must have a proof that excludes a specific type of gold or silver with that proof. How can he do that when we have a proof specifically concerning women's jewelry, where he said: If you do not pay its zakah, it is a brand of fire? Therefore, a Muslim should not hesitate if he is afflicted with jewelry. Yes, if it reaches the nisab (the minimum threshold for zakah), it reaches the nisab, and then he does not pay the zakah on the pretext of what? That it is jewelry? No, rather we say: Zaynab, among the women, has dinars stored, but she did not reach the nisab except by the value of the bracelet on her hand. So the total of the gold she has reached the nisab, and it is obligatory to pay it out, because this is gold, and she does not have—also—gold, so the type is added to its type, and its zakah is paid out if it reaches the nisab, otherwise not. This is what can be said. As for saying outright: there is no zakah on it because it is jewelry, this is a false claim from two aspects, briefly: contradicting the general text, and contradicting the specific text, and this is the most important.